A Permian Ammonoid from New South Wales and the Correlation of the Upper Marine Series
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
AUSTRALIAN MUSEUM SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS Teichert, C., and Harold O. Fletcher, 1943. A Permian ammonoid from New South Wales and the correlation of the Upper Marine Series. Records of the Australian Museum 21(3): 156–163, plate xi. [28 June 1943]. doi:10.3853/j.0067-1975.21.1943.530 ISSN 0067-1975 Published by the Australian Museum, Sydney nature culture discover Australian Museum science is freely accessible online at http://publications.australianmuseum.net.au 6 College Street, Sydney NSW 2010, Australia A PERMIAN AMMONOID FROM NEW SOUTH WALES AND THE CORRELATION OF THE UPPER MARINE SERIES. By CURT TEICHERT AND H. O. FLETCHER. ( Plate xi, and Figures 1-3.) Abstract.-References to alleged occurrences of ammonoids in the Permian of New South Wales are numerous. With the exception of the one specimen described in this paper they all seem to refer to bellerophontids identical with or related to Warthia micromphala (Morris). An abbreviated historical review of that species is, therefore, included. The only indubitable ammonoid from the Permian of New South Wales was found in the Branxton stage of the Upper Marine series of the Hunter River Valley. The specimen represents a new species which is described as Adrianites (Neocrimites) meridionalis. The evolutionary stage reached by that species indicates an Artinskian age for the Branxton beds. A state of uncertainty has long existed regarding the occurrence of ammonoids in the Permian of New South Wales. A certain species, originally described as Bellerophon micromphalus by Morris in 1845, has subsequently been referred by different workers to such genera as Goniatites, Agathiceras, Warthia, Prolecanites, Paralegoceras and others, and it seems remarkable that no up-to-date description of any specimens to which any of these names has been attached should be available. The purpose of the present paper is to describe the only true ammonoid to which this specific name has ever been applied, and which, incidentally, is the only ammonoid ever secured from the Permian sequence in New South Wales. In order to clear the ground it will be advisable to go into the history of "Bellerophon micromphalus" and to demonstrate the many changes in the conception of that species. Historical Notes on "Bellerophon micromphalus". "Bellerophon micromphalus" was originally described by Morris (1845, p. 288, pI. 18, fig. 7) from the Upper Marine series of the Permian in the Illawarra District, New South Wales, but the specimen figured by its author is quite unlike what was later to be considered as a typical shell of that species. In 1847, McCoy (p. 308) recorded Bellerophon micromphalus from Wollongong and added that it was rare in the Muree sandstone of the Hunter River Valley. In the same year, Dana described Bellerophon undulatus from Harper's Hill and B. strictus from Illawarra. Two years later, Dana (1849, pp. 707-8) recorded and figured the same two species in addition to Bellerophon micromphalus, but his figure of the last-mentioned species is different from the figure published by Morris. de Koninck (1877, p. 201) placed B. undulatu8 Dana in the synonymy of B. micromphalus and, although he had seen no traces of septa, transferred the species to the genus Goniatites because of its external appearance. He apparently overlooked the fact that as early as 1850 RomeI' had already described a species from the Upper Devonian of Germany which he had named "Goniatites micromphalus". de Koninck's description of the species was repeated unchanged in the English edition of his work published in 1898. In the meantime, Etheridge (1878, p. 89) had listed "Goniatites micromphalus" as doubtfully related to Aganides Montfort, and (1880, p. 304) recorded the species from the Bowen River coalfield in Queensland. This reference was repeated by Etheridge in PERMIAN AMMONOID FROM N.S.W.-CURT TEICHERT AND H. O. FLETCHER. 157 1892 (p. 294). However, as early as 1880, Waagen had studied bellerophontids from the Productus limestone of the Salt Range in India and instituted a new genus Warthia for shells which showed no trace of a slit-band and were strongly involute and compressed, and (1880, p. 160) he stated his opinion that the Australian species Bellerophon undulatus, B. strictus and, B. rnicromphal1ls undoubtedly belonged to this genus. Foord (1890) recorded "Goniatites micromphalus" from the Kimberley district of Western Australia, but stated that his specimens were poor and showed no trace of septa. Etheridge (1894) described and figured three specimens from tIle Upper Marine series which he called "Goniatites (Prolecanites?) micromphalus". Among his figures is one of a portion of a suture, but it is not stated from which of the specimens it was drawn. Etheridge discussed the possibility that the species might either belong to Sandbergeroceras Hyatt or to Prolecanites MOjsisovics. In the same year and having had access to Etheridge's paper, Foord and Crick noted the resemblance of Etheridge's specimens, particularly the suture, to Agathiceras uraUcurn Karpinsky from the Artinsk beds of Russia, and they therefore referred the species with reservation to the genus Agathiceras. Frech, on the other hand, stated two years later (1896, p. 501) that the general form and spiral ornaments of this species agree with Gastrioceras, while its lobes agree with those of Prolecanites or Pronorites. At that time, of course, a complete suture was not known, as Etheridge had only figured a few of the lobes and saddles, and Frech thought that when this was known the species might possibly have to be referred to a new genus. In 1904 Chapman recorded "Goniatites 1nicromphalus" from the Irwin River district, Western Australia, without offering further comments, but in general the species was more or less confidently referred to Agathiceras as proposed by Foord and Crick. It is thus listed in many papers dealing with the Permian of Australia-as e.g. in David's monograph of the Hunter River coal fields, to mention only one of the most notable contributions-right up to 1924, when Chapman listed "Agathiceras micromphalum" from the "Carbo-Permian" of Port Keats in the Northern Territory. Of foreign references to the Australian species during this period might be mentioned Haug, who (1898, p. 33) included it in the list of then known species of Agathiceras, and Haniel, who in his description of Permian cephalopods from Timor (1915) compared "Goniatites (Agathiceras?) micromphalum" with his own Agathiceras sundaicum and A. ca.ncellatum. Girty (1908, p. 482) favoured the bellerophontid affinities of the species when he stated that in all probability it would prove to be a Warthia. In Australia its true affinities were first recognized by Whitehouse in 1926, who listed "Bellerophon (Warthia) micromphalus" among Permian species from eastern Australia. No further observations were, however, communicated, and in 1928 "Agathiceras 1nicrorrl,phalum" was again mentioned from the Permian of Australia in a comprehensive review published by Schuchert. Some further progress was made in the following year, 1929, when Thomas reported that he and Dr. Spath had examined specimens of alleged Agathiceras micromphalum from Australia, but found that they could equally well be bellerophontids. In the same year Reid (1929, p. 80) published a communication received from Dr. Whitehouse to the effect that "two similarly coiled species, a common gastropod and a rare cephalopod, have been referred to this one species by earlier writers", in particular by Etheridge in 1894. This is the first suggestion that the specimens which had been given the specific name micromphalus might not necessarily all be conspecific, and that the name had been applied to gastropods as well as to a cephalopod. In the following year Reed (1930, p. 43) described some fossils from the Permian of Brazil, which closely resembled Morris's species, as "Bellerophon? cf. microm phalus", stating that the true position of the species must remain an open question. Two years later, however, he (1932, p. 69) unreservedly identified "Warthia micromphala (Morris)" from the Agglomeratic Shales of Kashmir; he comments on the remarkable 158 RECORDS OF THE AUSTRALIAN MUSEUM. fact that Etheridge was the only author who had ever observed any traces of septa in any specimens that had ever been referred to that species and that nobody else had been able to confirm such observations. David and Sussmilch (1931, p. 500) helped to solve some of the mystery surrounding the species by stating that "the only specimen of an Agathiceras found in Australia and showing a suture, and referred by Etheridge to Agathiceras micromphalum, was obtained from a shaft sunk in the Upper Marine Series, at a horizon a few hundred feet above the top of the Greta Coal Measures". Furthermore, the authors state that the Ravensfield sandstone is particularly rich in a fossil classed as Agathiceras micromphalum, but now considered to be a Bellerophon. On the same page Whitehouse is quoted as questioning the affinities of the ammonoid with Agathiceras; he considered it to be nearer to Paralegoceras. There have been no more recent contributions to the solution of the problem. Miller and Furnish (1940, p. 119) included Australia in the list of countries from which species of Agathiceras were known, and Teichert (1942, p. 223) stated that the only ammonoid ever reported from eastern Australia was an alleged Paragastrioceras from Queensland, implying that all references to "Agathiceras" or other ammonoid genera in eastern Australia were erroneous.